What did he mean by this...

even more interesting, considering his works are ultimately famous because of their social importance, not to say that his art itself isn't magnificent, but let's be honest, he's famous because he wrote about some old guy dicking a little girl.

>What did he mean by this?
Nothing. He was a retard with nothing worthwhile to say.

This. Also a pedo.

More proof that Constance Garnett was the best thing to ever happen to Dosto, though Nabokov would disagree on that too

all of nabby's opinions are trash. he never wrote a novel within a mile of dostoyevsky's masterpieces. even the authors he revered (tolstoy, joyce, kafka, proust, etc.) would agree.

Dostoevsky belongs in the same category as Shakespeare, Homer, and the authors of the Bible. Nabokov isn't worthy to speak his name. For all his talk, Nabokov was a far better grammarian than he was an author and seems more suited to criticism than literature.

god i love that woman, greatest female author in existence.

if even that, i would say he would have been a great highschool teacher, but it might be wise to keep him away from the children.

Spoilers ahead!

> young nobody coming to soulless industrial city and scheming to kill the rich merchant he works for with merchant's immoral wife
> young bitter loser whose life is even less bearable after suicide
> common whore being the bane of seemingly regular family of a man she captivates, and also his own bane (dying kid included with this item)
> maddened middle class killer on the run whose maniac plan to get rich failed
> spiritual one being tortured by worldly creatures and their vanity
> that one book you've read

I'm not even counting his stories, as I don't remember which resemble Tolstoy's heavy-headed confessions more than Dostoyevsky's ones.

Vladimir could say he was being '''''ironic''''' and mock Dostoyevsky as much as he wanted. He sure liked smokescreens.

>“These are not really Lolitas…,” I observed, finally. “They are sixteen, seventeen years old.”
>“Yes,” she said. “Nabokov was five years off. What most men like is not the moment that precedes puberty, but the one immediately after. Anyway, he wasn’t a very good writer…”
>I too had never been able to bear that mediocre and mannered pseudo-poet, that clumsy imitator of Joyce, who had never been lucky enough to possess the energy that sometimes enabled the insane Irishman to rise above his ponderous prose.
>A collapsed pastry, that was what Nabokov’s style had always made me think of."

> Nabokov was five years off.

NORMIES REEEEEOUEOUEOUEcq

well, how rude. Nabokov would never insult anyone like that. how unfair.

All this means is that he feels people who usually promote "art for art's sake" are really not following this code, and because of this feels using the phrase is a silly cliched gimmick used mainly by the aforementioned people. From this excerpt alone you can't really infer his actual views on "art as it's own end" because he isn't commenting on that, but rather the aestheticism movement and posturing of people like Wilde.

This is rich coming from someone whose fiction is thinly veiled thinkpieces with copypasted wikipedia segments.

If you take a look at The Picture of Dorian Gray, the whole work is a way of pushing Wilde's opinion on aesthetics. That's a form of moralism or didacticism.

The greatest living author by far.

For sure, because you can take neat little quotes out of his fiction and post it on r9k to have a circlejerk with your fellow incels about it.

Volcel desu :^)

Llosa.

lateral hume

Those are from Nabokov's books?

>A collapsed pastry, that was what Nabokov’s style
Lmao
14-16 is the patrician range btw. A specific beauty that blooms and fades immediately

To me it seems like when someone say something in the lines of "Never say never" and you go like:
- WoW, so paradoxical.

>ren

nice

Dostoevsky is widely considered to be bad with words. He was a writer of ideas. His characters feel real because of his psychology. But that does not undo his tactlessness with words. What make Shakespeare and Homer so great is their combination of insists with an unrivaled facility to manipulate words, which is what makes a great writer for writing is the manipulation of words.

>14-16 is patrician
>posts a girl who's 19
ok

Why does he need worthwhile things to say. Novels don't necessarily need to put forward a statement or an idea.

>Dostoevsky is widely considered to be bad with words.

Do you even speak Russian?

No, but Russians have expressed that opinion. Also he isn't Joyce, he isn't a writer that attempts to maximize the power of language, this is something that is still apparent in translation. Borges said that Dostoevsky is an author who does not suffer at all through translation for this very reason.